Book Detailing the Story of Infamous Abortionist Left off New York Times Best-Seller List

/0 Comments/in , /by

A popular book chronicling the story of abortionist Kermit Gosnell, who was convicted for murdering several infants, was left off of The New York Times best-seller list.

Since its release on Jan. 24, “Gosnell: The Untold Story of America’s Most Prolific Serial Killer” quickly reached Amazon’s best-seller list, but was left off The New York Times’ hardcover nonfiction best-seller list.

It should have been the “fourth best-selling nonfiction title,” according to a press release by Regnery Publishing, the book’s publisher.

Gosnell-COVER-676x1024

“Gosnell” authors Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer covered the detailed story of the prolific abortion doctor and convicted murderer. The book includes an exposé of Gosnell’s practices, including a description of “his collection of severed baby feet and heads in his basement,” according to the Conservative Book Club.

According to Publishers Weekly, McElhinney and McAleer’s book was the ninth best-selling on the hardcover nonfiction best-seller list last week, and currently sits at No. 22 on the list.

When released, the book quickly sold out at both Amazon and Barnes & Noble and reached the top spot on Amazon’s “Hot New Release” list on the first day of its release.

“This book rose to No. 4 on Amazon without any coverage from the mainstream media,” McAleer told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “The irony is that the book is about how the mainstream media refused to cover Gosnell’s murder trial. And even today, they’re still being shamefully dishonest.”

McElhinney and McAleer recently spoke at a Heritage Foundation event about their decision to write the book and produce a movie about Gosnell.

McAleer said that if the book had been published on the best-seller list, it would have been the first time the book was even mentioned by The New York Times.

“New York Times readers would’ve said, ‘What’s this book I’ve never heard of?’” McAleer said.

The book, however, is listed at No. 13 on the Feb. 12 edition of The New York Times’ combined print and e-book nonfiction list, Danielle Rhoades Ha, New York Times vice president of communications, told The Daily Signal in an email last week.

According to Rhoades Ha, the list was manufactured based on “confidential” sales records provided by retailers.

“The Times’s best-seller lists are based on a detailed analysis of book sales from a wide range of retailers who provide us with specific and confidential context of their sales each week,” she said. “These standards are applied consistently, across the board in order to provide Times readers our best assessment of what books are the most broadly popular at that time.”

This is not the first time The New York Times has snubbed a conservative author, according to NewsBusters.

“The Intimidation Game: How the Left Is Silencing Free Speech,” written by a Wall Street Journal editorial board member Kimberley Strassel was left off of the top 20 hardcover best-seller list when it was released in June 2016, despite selling more copies than some of the books on the list.

Similar instances have occurred to other conservative authors, including Dinesh D’Souza, Ted Cruz, and David Limbaugh, according to NewsBusters. (For more from the author of “Book Detailing the Story of Infamous Abortionist Left off New York Times Best-Seller List” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

You’ve Heard People Compare Trump to Hitler. So We Asked a Woman Who Was Born in Nazi Germany…

/0 Comments/in , , /by

A popular talking point on the left is that Donald Trump has things in common with Hitler.

But is this the case? Independent Journal Review decided to speak to a woman born in Nazi Germany about the comparison . . .

[Inga] Andrews said:

“What is going on in this country is giving me chills. Trump is not like Hitler. Just because a leader wants order doesn’t mean they’re like a dictator.

What reminds me more of Hitler than anything else isn’t Trump, it’s the destruction of freedom of speech on the college campuses — the agendas fueled by the professors.”

(Read more from “You’ve Heard People Compare Trump to Hitler. So We Asked a Woman Who Was Born in Nazi Germany…” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Women Protesting President Trump’s Request to Dress ‘Like a Woman’: Are They Serious?

/0 Comments/in , /by

A curious little skirmish happened last week that illustrated how reactionary and unreasonable things are out there right now.

President Trump reportedly wants his staff to look professional and “pulled together” at all times. And he had the nerve to ask the ladies to dress … “like women.” Gasp!

Womankind everywhere arose and took to the Twitterverse to show their outrage over such an insult! Women sent photos of themselves in every manner of professional dress under the hashtag #DressLikeaWoman in order to put the President in his place.

For my money, this is a perfect example of women overreacting, getting offended by something benign, and becoming defensive for no reason.

No one expects the female police officer to wear anything other than the uniform, just like a male police officer. No one expects the female surgeon not to wear surgical scrubs. No one expects a woman on a construction site to wear a skirt and stilettos rather than jeans and steel-toed boots. No one thinks the female soldier wears a different uniform than the men wear. Common sense, people, please.

When a job requires a specific uniform then no one expects the ladies to be dressed differently. Surely, we can all be adult enough to acknowledge that President Trump understands this, and it has nothing at all to do with his specific request. In the White House setting, a certain decorum can and should be expected, and professional dress is part of the package. It’s reasonable to ask the ladies to dress in a professional manner befitting a lady.

Men and Women Are … Different

But what’s all the fuss about anyway? If there is nothing specific about dressing “like a woman” then why does Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner bother to wear a dress these days? Why does he not continue to wear a shirt and tie and loafers? Why did he change his fashion, if it has no bearing on his supposed new gender?

Our society is trying frantically to have everything every which way all at once. And it doesn’t work. Either there is no way of dressing that is unique to the ladies, or there is. If there is, then a man wouldn’t, or shouldn’t, dress like a lady, and a lady wouldn’t, or shouldn’t, dress like a man. And if that’s the case, then there must be something unique about being either a man or a woman. There must be a distinction. Everyone celebrating “Caitlyn” is unwittingly conceding that men and women are recognizably different.

Try as we might to erase the line, we still see the difference, and we still act on it. We think and act and live according to that difference. Because that’s sane. It’s healthy and normal and good. Men and women ARE different! That’s a primary feature of the human design, not a bug. It’s not a problem to be solved, or an unfortunate obstacle to be overcome. It’s a beautiful thing to be celebrated and honored.

This #DressLikeAWoman brouhaha is women fighting the wrong fight. This is what annoys me about so many modern women. Rather than get huffy over what it might mean to “dress like a woman,” let’s defend the fact that there is such a thing as a woman, and that a man is not one! After all, if anyone can be either/or or neither/none on any given day, then what does it matter what anyone’s wearing?

I still live on planet Sanity, where men and women do indeed exist, and where they are indeed distinct and separate, and where that’s a wonderful thing. On planet Sanity, the ladies do indeed glory in lovely, feminine fashions while at the same time donning the same uniforms, scrubs and job-specific clothing that the gentlemen wear, when that’s what is required for the job. The gentlemen still get to be gentlemen, and the ladies still get to be ladies, and everyone still gets to do their jobs. Common sense reigns. It’s beautiful.

Protest This

But I digress. How many of the women who got their Tweeters in a twist over this “dress like women” business have paid money to be “entertained” by Fifty Shades of Grey? How many of those women oohed and aahed because Christian Grey was so sexy and rich and complicated that they just forgot they were watching him assault a woman under the guise of romance? How many of those women consume the garbage coming out of Hollywood that constantly treats women like objects for gratification? Rap stars are allowed to call women “bit**es” and “hoes” and shout about every crude sex act, and it’s just art and entertainment and people gobble it up. If you want to protest something, protest this.

Or this: millions of girls in this world are still genitally mutilated by a truly oppressive and violent societal code that does not consider them people with human rights.

Or this: the growing sex trafficking that steals little girls and enslaves them in the most horrifying way imaginable.

Asking the women who work in the White House to dress professionally, like women? That doesn’t even deserve a blip on the radar. American women need to stop overreacting to trivialities and save their indignation for subjects that deserve it. (For more from the author of “Women Protesting President Trump’s Request to Dress ‘Like a Woman’: Are They Serious?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Planned Parenthood Sets ‘Abortion Quotas’, Rewards Clinics With Pizza Parties

/0 Comments/in , /by

The latest video in Live Action’s new investigative series of Planned Parenthood reveals the company rewards its centers with pizza parties for meeting abortion sales quotas – and institutes a “corrective action plan” when they don’t.

“Every center had a goal for how many abortions were done,” Sue Thayer, a former Planned Parenthood manager, explains in the video. “And centers that didn’t do abortions like mine that were family planning clinics had a goal for the number of abortion referrals.

“And it was on this big grid, and if we hit our goal, our line was green. If we were five percent under, it was yellow. If we were 10 percent under, it was red. That’s when we needed to have a corrective action plan – why we didn’t hit the goal, what we’re gonna do differently next time.”

This video, “Planned Parenthood’s Abortion Quotas,” is the fourth in Live Action’s series “Abortion Corporation.” The series has shown Planned Parenthood employees admitting its name is “deceptive” because they don’t promote parenting.

“Ultrasounds for Killing, Not Care at Planned Parenthood” and the accompanying testimony “Planned Parenthood Managers: Ultrasounds for Abortions, Not Care” highlight how Planned Parenthood will only do ultrasounds as part of an abortion – not for women who want to keep their babies. “The Prenatal Care Deception” shows Planned Parenthoods nationwide denying women prenatal care because they “specialize” in abortions. (Read more from “Planned Parenthood Sets ‘Abortion Quotas’, Rewards Clinics With Pizza Parties” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Majority of Democrats Consider Christianity as Violent as Islam

/0 Comments/in , /by

Nearly 66 percent of Democrats believe that while Islam is dangerous, Christianity is just as bad.

This trusting attitude towards Islam is revealed in a new CBS poll. According to the poll of more than 1,000 adults, about seven in 10 Democrats believe that Christianity, Judaism, Mormonism, et al, encourage just as much violence as Islam . . .

Republicans, meanwhile, have a much chillier view of Islam–63 percent saying Islam is more violent than other religions and only two percent calling Islam less violent than other faiths.

This survey comes following 17 years of attacks on Americans inspired by Islamic ideology, including: the 9/11 attacks in 2001; the San Bernardino, California, shooting that left 14 dead, the Pulse Nightclub attack in Orlando that killed 50, as well as attacks in Paris and Nice, France in the last two years. (Read more from “Majority of Democrats Consider Christianity as Violent as Islam” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

An Appeal to the President and Vice-President to Reconsider Their LGBT Strategy

/0 Comments/in , /by

Dear Mr. President and Mr. Vice-President,

I write this letter as a supporter and advocate, not a critic or adversary. As someone who voted for you and who regularly calls on millions of Americans to pray for you. I also write this with the understanding that you have been elected to serve the American people as a whole and not just one particular faction of Americans.

The great challenge, however, is one that you must deal with on a daily basis: When you stand up for what you believe is right — be it securing our borders or nominating a solid pro-life justice to the Supreme Court — you will alienate a certain number of Americans who oppose your policies and choices. That is inevitable, although regrettable, but if there is any political leader on the planet who is more concerned with acting on convictions than with pleasing people, it is you.

And this brings me to the heart of this appeal.

While you have consistently positioned yourself as a friend of the LGBT community during your campaigning, having Peter Thiel speak at the Republican National Convention and holding up a “LGBT’s for Trump” flag at one of your rallies, you have never positioned yourself as a champion of the gay and transgender agenda.

Conversely, you have most certainly positioned yourself as a champion of religious freedom, and you know that without the vote of conservative Christians (with whom I identify), you could not have gained the presidency. In that respect, we are a unique and important part of your constituency and some of your strongest supporters.

In your first weeks in office, we have been tremendously heartened by some key choices you have made, and we were encouraged by the forcefulness of your speech at the National Prayer Breakfast. It is clear that our religious liberties are very important to you, and they should be, since they are at the very foundation of our nation.

We were also encouraged to hear that you were considering legislation that would have protected religious groups from the negative effects of one of President Obama’s executive orders, namely, the order that put sexual orientation and gender identity on a par with skin color and ethnicity, as if gay was the new black or as if a man identifying as a woman was the same as him being Asian or Hispanic.

As it turns out, you decided to uphold Mr. Obama’s pro-LGBT activism, meaning, that while standing strongly for religious liberty you are unintentionally undercutting that very same liberty.

Mr. President, I truly believe that you desire to stand with LGBT Americans and you do not want to see them hurt or attacked by others, and I second your sentiments wholeheartedly. At the same time, your actions will potentially punish conservative Christians and others for simply living out their faith. Not only so, but I believe you will soon learn that there is no appeasing LGBT activists and that as long as you demonstrate loyalty to your conservative Christian base, you will be considered their enemy.

To make matters worse — and here I turn my appeal to Mr. Pence — when the vice president recently appeared on ABC News with George Stephanopoulos, discussing this very issue, Mr. Pence responded to a pointed question about this action by stating that “throughout the campaign, President Trump made it clear that discrimination would have no place in our administration.” He added, “I think the generosity of his spirit, recognizing that in the patriot’s heart, there’s no room for prejudice, is part of who this president is.”

Mr. Vice President, I know you are a committed Christian yourself, but may I ask if you are saying that it is prejudiced and discriminatory for someone to believe that it’s best for a child to have a mother and father (rather than two fathers or two mothers)? That it is prejudiced and discriminatory to believe that marriage is the union of a man and a woman (and therefore not the union of two men or two women)? That it is prejudiced and discriminatory to believe that a 15-year-old boy who believes he is a girl should not be allowed to play on the girls’ sports teams or share their locker rooms and shower stalls?

Last year in England, a 42-year-old Christian evangelist was handing out gospel pamphlets on the street when a 19-year-old gay teen asked him what his God said about homosexuality. The preacher quoted Genesis to him, explaining that God made Adam and Eve to reproduce and have children.

Subsequently, the preacher was arrested and held in custody overnight and “accused of threatening or abusive behaviour ‘aggravated by prejudice relating to sexual orientation’ — despite not swearing or using any form of offensive language.”

Vice President Pence, with all due honor, I ask you: Do you see how your choice of words reinforces the same mentality that led to the arrest of this Christian evangelist, specifically, that his actions were allegedly “aggravated by prejudice relating to sexual orientation”?

And President Trump, with the utmost respect, I ask you: Do you see how the executive order you upheld is a step in the wrong direction, a direction that ultimately leads to discrimination against Christians?

I’m quite aware, Mr. President, that the case in England is different than the federal legislation that you signed, but having monitored the trajectory of LGBT activism for more than a decade, I can assure you that you will not win the widespread support of the LGBT community until you distance yourself from the evangelical Christians who helped elect you and who gave you wise counsel throughout your campaign. In other words, you will not be viewed as a real friend of the LGBT community until you side with gay activism at the cost of Christian liberties.

May I ask you to give these matters your prayerful consideration, inviting some of your most trusted spiritual advisors for input as well? And may I ask you, at the least, to go ahead and write the executive order we were expecting, namely the one enshrining our religious liberties?

If you put religious liberties first, it will be for the good of the nation as a whole.

If you side against these precious liberties, it will hurt the nation as a whole.

May God Himself give you wisdom. You have my prayerful support. (For more from the author of “An Appeal to the President and Vice-President to Reconsider Their LGBT Strategy” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Congress Is Right to Undo Obama-Era Education Rules

/0 Comments/in , /by

Last week, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce took an important step toward rescinding some of the most burdensome regulations levied under the Every Student Succeeds Act (the replacement for the No Child Left Behind Act) by the Obama administration Department of Education.

Reps. Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., and Todd Rokita, R-Ind., formally introduced resolutions of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act for two of the Obama administration’s prescriptive regulations: rules governing teacher preparation programs and rules governing accountability under the Every Student Succeeds Act.

These resolutions of disapproval would prevent the Department of Education from implementing the rules or any substantially similar rules without congressional approval.

As Lindsey Burke and I argued in a recent paper concerning regulatory overreach under the Every Student Succeeds Act, scrapping the law’s regulations written by the Obama administration’s Department of Education through use of the Congressional Review Act would help remove some of the prescription layered onto the act.

While congressional architects envisioned the law as a vehicle for curtailing some of the federal overreach that had been created through No Child Left Behind, the regulations were not written in the same spirit.

Rescinding these regulations is a good first step. But in addition, Congress should pursue policies that genuinely restore state and local control in education in a way that the Every Student Succeeds Act fell short of accomplishing.

Proponents hailed this education law as one that would limit power from Washington, restoring state and local control of education by eliminating many of No Child Left Behind’s onerous requirements.

However, while it eliminated provisions like Adequate Yearly Progress and Highly Qualified Teacher mandates—one-size-fits-all standards that put Washington in the driver’s seat of education—the Every Student Succeeds Act kept in place a complex federal framework of oversight and high levels of spending.

Importantly, states were not given the option to opt out of the law through reforms such as the A-PLUS (Academic Partnerships Lead Us to Success) Act—a long-held conservative policy priority.

President Barack Obama’s Department of Education under Secretary John King took the prescriptive law and proceeded to write regulations that magnified that law’s shortcomings. The regulations narrowed possibilities for state flexibility, complicated decisions, increased paperwork, and generally wrapped states ever more tightly in a web of federal rules.

Ignoring statutory prohibitions, the Department of Education added qualifications to accountability indicators, dictated the methodology for weighing indicators, and inserted unnecessary reporting requirements.

Some of the rules were breathtakingly meddlesome, including one that dictated to the precise dollar amount states must invest in each school that needs improvement.

Many state boards of education, state superintendents, and other state leaders used the comment period on this accountability rule to illustrate how this level of federal prescription would negatively impact their state, their students, and their school finances.

Some state officials, like Randy Dorn, Washington state’s superintendent of public instruction, compared the rule to the draconian system under No Child Left Behind: “[I]n some instances, it seems like a return to the archaic measures required under No Child Left Behind.”

Other states, like South Dakota, suggested that the federal Department of Education was hopelessly out of touch with their needs and concerns:

We find the estimates submitted to the Office of Management and Budget to be wildly out of sync with the effort the [South Dakota Department of Education] will need to undertake to integrate data systems and report the require data. In particular, this is true because there are not decreased reporting requirements in other areas. This will be a significant feat, in particular for a state that is minimally funded and minimally staffed; the burden compliance will place on our staff should not be underestimated.

The specific needs of each state and local community cannot be met or anticipated by agency bureaucrats from Washington, D.C.

Regulations that are used to clarify points of confusion in a statute are necessary, but the use of regulation to prescribe the day-to-day operations of local schools is an overreach of federal power, particularly when the needs of each community are so unique.

The resolutions of disapproval are an important first step to limiting federal encroachment in local decision-making.

Now, Congress should take the opportunity to allow states to totally opt out of the Every Student Succeeds Act, and to put dollars toward their own state and local priorities. (For more from the author of “Why Congress Is Right to Undo Obama-Era Education Rules” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Former Muslim Refugee: Think ‘Rationally’ About Dangers of Radical Islam

/0 Comments/in , , /by

A former Muslim refugee is asking her fellow American citizens to think “rationally” about the dangers of radical Islam.

“I know what it’s like to fear rejection, deportation and the dangers that await you back home,” Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former Muslim of Somali origin, writes in the Huffington Post.

Ali writes that she became an American citizen after escaping an arranged marriage and working in the Netherlands at a factory and as an interpreter for abused Muslim women. Overtime, she says she made the decision to leave the religion of Islam because it was “too intolerant of free thought.”

She was “excited” when she heard Trump’s August 2016 speech about combatting the underlying ideology of radical Islam which oppresses women, the LGBT community and other religions. She was also encouraged by his promise to help moderate Muslims who strove to combat radicalism.

Four Types of Muslim Immigrants

“In the course of working with Muslim communities over the past two decades, I have come to distinguish between four types of Muslim immigrants: adapters, menaces, coasters and fanatics,” Ali says.

The adapters are those who adapt to the customs and embrace the freedoms of Western civilization; menaces are often young men who are subject to and then commit crimes of domestic violence; coasters are those who want to take advantage of welfare without working; and fanatics “use the freedoms of the countries that gave them sanctuary to spread an uncompromising practice of Islam.”

Ali writes that some people move from one category to the other over time, which makes it more difficult to distinguish between adapters and troublemakers.

“[T]he problem of Islamist terrorism will not be solved by immigration controls and extreme vetting alone,” she writes. “That’s because the problem is already inside our borders.”

Ali cites surveys which reveal majorities of Sharia-supporting Muslims in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Iraq — whence most Muslim immigrants are expected to come to the U.S. in the coming decades — agree with the death penalty for those who leave Islam.

Ali writes:

Such attitudes imply a readiness to turn a blind eye to the use of violence and intimidation tactics against, say, apostates and dissidents — and a clear aversion to the hard-won achievements of Western feminists and campaigners for minority rights. Admitting individuals with such views is not in the American national interest.

While Ali says she was disappointed in the clumsy implementation of Trump’s temporary travel ban, she still supports the president’s longterm plan of rejecting any would-be immigrants who support terrorist groups or believe in Sharia law over the Constitution.

“American citizens — including immigrants — must be protected from that ideology and the violence that it promotes,” she writes. “But the threat is too multifaceted to be dealt with by executive orders. That is why Trump was right to argue in August for a commission of some kind — I would favor congressional hearings — to establish the full magnitude and nature of the threat.”

“Until we recognize that this ideology is already in our midst, we shall expend all our energies in feverish debates about executive orders, when what is needed is cool, comprehensive legislation,” Ali writes. (For more from the author of “Former Muslim Refugee: Think ‘Rationally’ About Dangers of Radical Islam” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Love out of Tragedy: Boston Bombing Survivor Gets Engaged to Hero Firefighter

/0 Comments/in , /by

Roseann Sdoia was one of hundreds injured in the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing that killed three. Mike Materia was the firefighter who rushed to her aid, stayed by her side while she was transported to the hospital, and checked on her throughout her recovery after her right leg was amputated.

Now, he’s her fiancé.

The two went on their first date two months after the bombing, Fox 5 News reported. Materia proposed in December of last year.

“I asked him if I was going to die,” Sdoia told the New York Post, recalling the day they met. “And he told me that I was going to be OK, that I only had a flesh wound.”

Materia “was so kind and caring,” she said.

On Wednesday the couple participated in the Empire State Building Run-Up, the New York Times reported. The event benefited the Challenged Athletes Foundation. Sdoia, a beneficiary of Challenged Athletes Foundation herself, climbed all 1,576 steps with her prosthetic leg. Materia completed the challenge in full firefighter gear.

Sdoia and Materia are also scheduled in March to release Perfect Strangers, a book about four people whose lives were impacted by the bombing. (For more from the author of “Love out of Tragedy: Boston Bombing Survivor Gets Engaged to Hero Firefighter” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Big Lesson From the Boy Scouts Demise: Appeasement Doesn’t Work

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Boy Scouts of America have capitulated to liberal culture. Matt Walsh called them “spineless cowards” and bid them goodbye:

Goodbye, Boy Scouts. You fools. You invertebrates. You caved once again and will now allow “transgender boys” — also known as girls — to enter your ranks. I guess you forgot that the girls already have their own branch of the Scouts. It’s called the Girl Scouts. You know, the one with the cookies. Will the Boy Scouts start selling cookies now, too? That would be one upside to all of this, at least.

Walsh is right, that the BSA is no longer the organization it was founded to be, and in fact is redundant given that girls who want to act and live as boys can now join. But I would stop short of calling them fools. They’re just appeasers who learned an old lesson: Appeasement doesn’t work.

A History Lesson on Failed Attempts at Appeasement

The BSA fell victim to appeasing antagonists and mistaking those antagonists as advocates for limited change. Those antagonists painted themselves as persecuted victims who share Scout values, but in fact they were traitors to those values. History shows over and over again that appeasing traitors always leads to defeat.

Behold the sad story of Edvard Beneš, President of Czechoslovakia from 1935-1938. He was a national socialist — a believer in a unity of Czechs and Slovak ethnic groups. He was a respected diplomat of great skill. But history made him a great fool. He faced a group of separatists he believed shared his aims and suffered genuine persecution, but the persecution was hyped and staged — led by traitor Konrad Henlein.

Henlein was the head of a political party seeking autonomy for Sudeten Germans. In fact Henlein was a Nazi agent taking his orders from Berlin. Beneš offered Henlein everything he asked for, but Henlein’s orders were to refuse all offers, as Hitler wanted to annex Czechoslovakia. British PM Neville Chamberlain’s visit to Munich capped the appeasement, but didn’t stop the ever-growing demands.

Beneš was forced from office in October 1938, after Henlein fled to Berlin. The Germans replaced Beneš with a Nazi puppet, and the Wehrmacht rolled into Prague unopposed.

The Boy Scouts Ignored Their Most Important Weapon: Biblical Truth

Now that the Boy Scouts have capitulated, they will be annexed by liberal culture. Some churches, which have already been annexed, will continue to support the organization. The Cub Scout “transgender crisis” in New Jersey was nothing more than the ever-growing demands of a culture that refuses to be appeased, but wants to occupy and annex everything.

By the time that crisis came along, the ending was already written. When, in 2013, the BSA abandoned a Supreme Court ruling that gave them the right to exclude gay Scouts and leaders from their organization, they surrendered. Unlike Czechoslovakia, which lacked the weapons to stop Germany, the Boy Scouts had a super weapon, and they gave it up.

Why? Because they were scared of losing funding. They were scared of losing relevance, and they were scared of shrinking, like the culture they previously supported. As church attendance and Biblical adherence declined, the Scouts declined with it. They believed that they lacked the weapons to fight the culture, when in fact they had two unassailable weapons: Biblical moral truth, and a Supreme Court decision in their favor.

Once the BSA abandoned their strong defense, the end was inevitable. The culture would not be appeased. Gay Scouts turned into gay leaders. Then that turned into a “transgender crisis.”

Time to Say Goodbye

Walsh is right that soon we’ll see liberal indoctrination in the Boy Scouts. Christian values and absolute morals will be tossed and replaced with relativism and “many truths.” The definitions of family, gender, and manhood will become a muddled mess of validation versus truth. The Bible will be held in contempt or twisted to liberal ends.

What will they teach boys to prepare them to be men? Camping, knot tying and woodsman skills were never the point of what the Scouts taught. They taught values. The activities served to reinforce those values and cement them into boys’ psyches. Positive peer pressure and group bonding is a powerful teaching tool. The Scouts may keep doing the same activities, but the lessons will be completely different.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the Boy Scouts and the Girl Scouts merged at some point, given that there’s no longer a difference. To the Scouts’ new masters, teaching “gender roles” is prudish and oppressive.

Christians must now avoid and withdraw from the Boy Scouts. The organization, through appeasement, has been thoroughly annexed and handed over to the God-mocking liberal culture of the day. Better to choose Trail Life USA, Royal Rangers, or some other Christ-centered mentoring program that teaches boys to be Godly men.

The lesson cannot be more clearly delivered. Appeasement doesn’t work. Persecution is part of the package for Christians. We must never abandon the truth. (For more from the author of “The Big Lesson From the Boy Scouts Demise: Appeasement Doesn’t Work” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.